Jump to content



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    Thank you. That’s all I was trying to say. Crazy though that you’re on your 2nd 6.4 in 120k miles. I didn’t realize the 6.4 was that bad.
  2. Fair enough. I’ll see if I can find them.
  3. What kind of issues I’ve you had?
  4. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    I’m not sure why you keep bringing up the new truck market when it’s not relevant to what’s being discussed. The reply you quoted was a counter point to the claim that 7.3 powered trucks have such strong pricing because of the high price of new trucks. I dismissed that because if you compare 2002 7.3 SDs to 2003-2004 6.0 SDs, the price is much higher for the older 7.3 trucks and the only reason for that is the desirability of that engine. This never had to do with Ford this or new trucks that or who’s making money off what. There was no comparison made to 7.3L trucks and new SDs.
  5. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    I’m not sure on that. You can do a quick search of 2002-2003 Super Dutys and the 7.3 trucks will be thousands more than the 6.0 trucks. 6.0 trucks were in the $8,000-$12,000 range while 7.3 vehicles, some with higher miles, were in the $16,000-$33,000 range (that $33k truck is a crew cab lariat with 70k miles—but $33k is wildly overpriced) So it’s obviously not the cost of new trucks because if it was the 6.0 would be in that general area (as would the Ram and GM models from that era)
  6. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    I never mentioned new sales. This was a discussion regarding the 6.0L and how it was inferior to the 7.3L in terms of reliability. I don’t think it needs to be stated that a 275HP and 525TQ engine would not be able to be marketed/sold today (despite that amount of power being plenty for the vast majority of people). Ford seems to have less issues with the 6.7L than the 6.0/6.4 which is good.
  7. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    Oh not at all. Legitimately the prices for 7.3L powered vehicles is through the roof (relatively) and the 7.3L was/is an extremely reliable engine.
  8. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    Ford certainly held the greater burden of responsibility for the 6.0 as the internal emails have proven. They knew it was a problematic engine in Super Duty applications and denied to customers it had issues. Speaking of diesels though it astounds me how much 7.3L PowerStroke go for these days. They really retain their value. Proof that high tech is not necessarily better. It would be an interesting study to look at warranty costs for the 7.3L compared to the 6.0L. I bet in all the years of the 7.3L the warranty costs were less than half of the 6.0L and it’s rather short run.
  9. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    Granted any company would do the same thing as Ford and not acknowledge that their product has major issues. Tesla will never admit that their products are, for lack of a better term, junk but it seems Ford has had a lot of big mishaps lately. The 6.0 diesel continues to be a headache and still in the news along with the transmission in the Fiesta and Focus and now the Explorer/Aviator.
  10. FR739

    Wow! Really???

    Now just hold on a second because in the Explorer PI Hybrid an article from the Chicago sun times was linked and a person was quoted as saying: "After quality issues last year and a two-month shutdown due to the coronavirus, the company reports its local operations are running 24 hours a day to meet demand. “We’re really proud of the vehicles we are building in Chicago,” Savona said. “The quality by all available measures has been terrific.” Perhaps they need to reassess. Acknowledging problems is not a bad thing although I’m very surprised Ford hasn’t come into Chicago with an iron fist and started fixing all the issues. They need to be aggressive and swift. I think a lot of higher ups at that plant need to be fired (or be fired a year ago).
  11. FR739

    Explorer PI Hybrid

    That’s a good question. I guess I don’t see why they would need a separate area for a vehicle that’s virtually identical to the civilian one. But I suppose it could be. Of course Ford is going to say that. They never really acknowledged there was ever problems with the Explorer and Aviator. They characterized the shipment of vehicles to Flat Rock(?) as “not out of the ordinary”. Unless by “robots” you mean their public messaging on the subject https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2019/09/13/ford-2020-explorer-lincoln-aviator-delivery/2292795001/
  12. I truly believe that the new Corvette is the best sports/fun car you can buy for it’s price point. Actually it punches FAR above its price point. I’ve seen a few on the road and the styling is jaw dropping. It looks phenomenal and very Italian. The interior is equally impressive. GM is bipolar in that they can design some of the worlds best large SUVs time and time again with an amazing focus on attention to detail and they make billions on them. Or they can come out with designs where you’re just left wondering who actually thought that was a good idea? Thankfully the Corvette is in the former versus the latter category.
  13. Despite being quite different vehicles, it would be interesting to see how much of those power trains are shared (or not shared). That seems to indicate this issue is bigger than maybe we’re being led to believe?
  14. Two things really struck me from that article. First, that issues with the 6.0 are still affecting Ford and still being litigated. Second, the staggering statistics regarding Fords warranty costs and the amount of money they have had to pay because of this engine. Those are not little numbers. That being said, with Fords clear dishonesty and cover up, I think the costs are deserved. You can’t tell your customers that engine is fine while suing the manufacturer of said engine for defects.
  15. Looks like we all are going to be in the dark for a while: https://www.autoblog.com/2020/10/14/ford-escape-phev-delayed-europe-kuga-recall-fire-risk/